Results 1 to 35 of 35
  1. #1

    Pay As You Go Hosting

    Right now, all the large web hosts operate on a flat rate basis. This means, most of you pay for a whole bunch of resources which you never use. Due to competitive pressures, hosts have been essentially forced to oversell, and due to clients trying to use the space (and cause them to lose money) they become forced to add invisible limits.

    So, with Pay-As-You-Go, there is a huge opportunity for a smaller website to save money, and a larger website doesn't have to worry about reaching invisible limits. They can be certain that their site is safe from disappearing (depending on the company it can be an ugly disappearance).

    Part of the issues I'm having is really marketing this to potential customers. The standard question 'how much does it cost?' is not as easily answered. I was also experimenting with cheaper pricing, the more you 'top up' your account.

    For example, you could pay $100.00 and get 20,000 credits. But if you only paid $10.00, you would only get 600 credits. So by topping up more, you would save money further. Remember of course that the credits are transferable to any future hosting, so even if you stopped hosting that one site, you could still use them for another project years down the road.

    Hopefully this has all made sense, and you can understand the troubles in marketing something like this. You can also see how it might be better than the traditional system in the majority of cases.

    What do you think it would take to make this system into one that would appeal to small business and the average consumer?

    What would be hesitations in using such a system?

    How could I make this into something explainable in the 5 seconds of attention span of the average consumer?
      0 Not allowed!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,904
    The problem is something like this, and I believe the main reason companies can't do it is because we'd have no idea how many clients we can put on a server. We'd have no measure of when a server should be considered 'full.'

    If we sold a client X credits. They might use it all in 1 week, bringing down the server. Or they might have it last 5 years...we'd never see money outside the initial payment but would still have to support them. (although I'm sure not much support would be needed.)

    This payment model actually exists in cloud systems where you can pay for the usage/hour/minute.
      0 Not allowed!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    on the ninkynonk!
    Posts
    907
    like tracfone for hosting.... kinda good idea but strange.
    Something awesome
    coming soon....
      0 Not allowed!

  4. #4
    That's fair Noppix,

    Obviously servers would be maintained around 90% full, and if websites experienced a growth which pushes beyond that then they can be relocated rather seamlessly to another server. The WHM JSON API makes it pretty easy to monitor the servers and know when it's time to relocate a client.

    I guess I have to ask: How this is more of a problem with pay as you go, as opposed to any other system? You never know the resource usage of a client, unless you are strictly not overselling. There would still be limits here, to protect against for example a DDOS attack, but they're completely flexible.

    I'm aware that cloud hosting uses this system, though the average consumer doesn't really need a full scale server. Aside from the extra money, there are a lot of hidden costs with that too - like needing a system administrator, or a lot of technical knowledge. If you're starting or running a small business, you know it's full time. You don't have time to waste on something like that.
    Last edited by azoundria; 03-10-2011 at 10:23 PM.
      0 Not allowed!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Modesto California
    Posts
    6,461
    Quote Originally Posted by azoundria View Post
    hosts have been essentially forced to oversell, and due to clients trying to use the space (and cause them to lose money) they become forced to add invisible limits.
    I dont think anyone is being forced to oversell, I think it has more or less to do with companies getting greedy, than anyone being forced to oversell.

    Personally I would rather pay a flat monthly fee, than have to pay different amounts every month. Just seems a little to confusing having to figure out exactly how much money it will cost to host your website. I've seen a few dedicated cloud services (like soft-layer) offering the system you are referring too. Not sure how popular it is though, like I said, I'd just rather pay the flat fee (espeacially if the company is not overselling).

    Also keep in mind that when you sign-up with a web hosting company, you are not just paying for the diskspace, bandwidth ect.. you are also paying for staff and support.
    Need Web Hosting? Click Here to Learn Why You Should Switch To FernGullyGraphics
    FernGullyGraphics --- 426 14th St. Suite #115 --- Modesto, California --- 95354

    Need Business Cards? Click Here
      0 Not allowed!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,904
    Quote Originally Posted by azoundria View Post
    That's fair Noppix,

    Obviously servers would be maintained around 90% full, and if websites experienced a growth which pushes beyond that then they can be relocated rather seamlessly to another server. The WHM JSON API makes it pretty easy to monitor the servers and know when it's time to relocate a client.

    I guess I have to ask how this is more of a problem with pay as you go, as opposed to any other system.
    With the current model the responsibility of knowing the needed resources falls on the client. They can come to a host with that need and the host can not only provide, but allocate and guarantee that the resources would be available to the client.

    If the client needs more, appropriate action can be taken.

    This also guarantees our revenue for the alloted, guaranteed space to the client. Used or unused.

    Moving sites back and forth can be dangerous and inefficient. Regardless of monitoring software, if a host misses a sudden growth and downtime occurs because of it, all of a sudden the host is liable for not being able to redeem the 'credits' right away because they needed an hour or so to move the site to a different server.

    etc. etc..I'm actually eating right now, and I have this solid point I wanted to make, but I don't think it's going to happen. I'll come back in a bit.
      0 Not allowed!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,904
    Edit...another thing I wanted to touch on was it creates the possibility of servers being used inefficiently. You might put an account on a certain server 'expecting' him to use X amount of credits and you move other accounts around according to this. It turns out that client only ended up using (1/3)X. Now that host had to pay the full bill on the server, but didn't receive anywhere near what was projected and are now at a big loss.
      0 Not allowed!

  8. #8
    Just seems a little to confusing having to figure out exactly how much money it will cost to host your website.
    I think you've touched on exactly the kind of issues I'd really need to focus on - how to avoid the confusion. For example, you use X storage and X bandwidth, then you could get back the rate for that. Then you can just use that number for budgeting for the year, and at the end there's still some left.

    Also keep in mind that when you sign-up with a web hosting company, you are not just paying for the diskspace, bandwidth ect.. you are also paying for staff and support.
    This is a very important point. I'm planning a flat base cost to cover this.

    I dont think anyone is being forced to oversell, I think it has more or less to do with companies getting greedy, than anyone being forced to oversell.
    Obviously nobody points a gun at the head of hosting providers and says oversell. It's mostly the decisions of consumers to go with overselling hosts and not understand or caring about the risks.

    Moving sites back and forth can be dangerous and inefficient. Regardless of monitoring software, if a host misses a sudden growth and downtime occurs because of it, all of a sudden the host is liable for not being able to redeem the 'credits' right away because they needed an hour or so to move the site to a different server.
    Firstly, with a set rate of 90%, it still guarantees 10% of the server is available for this situation. So a client has to grow to fill an entire 10% of the server. At 100 clients per server, this is a 1111% increase in growth on average. It's not very common in practice.

    Running out of storage would not result in downtime, only temporary failures adding things to disk. Running out of bandwidth would cause delays, though it would be ages before you reached the point of timeouts.

    Edit...another thing I wanted to touch on was it creates the possibility of servers being used inefficiently. You might put an account on a certain server 'expecting' him to use X amount of credits and you move other accounts around according to this. It turns out that client only ended up using (1/3)X. Now that host had to pay the full bill on the server, but didn't receive anywhere near what was projected and are now at a big loss.
    Servers would be utilized at 85-90% efficiency. There will always be the newest server which is less full. Any new clients would be placed there. I guess the argument is, X will just be part of this new server. If the server is near full, I could just put X on the next new server which I need to get anyways.
      0 Not allowed!

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,904
    How would they be used at 90%? How would I, as a host, know if a client is all of a sudden going to use 100% of his credits in the next day/month/week/year?

    When he/she buys credits, I actually initially would have no idea how much space to account for that client.
      0 Not allowed!

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by ninkynonk View Post
    like tracfone for hosting.... kinda good idea but strange.
    You can try many others, but that also depends that whats the needs are, if you needs are less then why you go for bigger plan
      0 Not allowed!

  11. #11
    It occurred to me Noppix, that you may have a somewhat different idea from mine here.

    The credits are decreased based on usage. The client doesn't spend them, except by having used resources.

    In order for a server to go from 90% to 100%, a client has to actually require those resources. For example, they could need to upload a very large number of files to their website (that would be one case) or a huge traffic surge. Mind you, as I said, we are looking at a huge increase (1111%), and this takes time.

    The instant the server goes past 90%, that's when accounts would be moved. Between that point and 100% is a considerable amount of time. Not even Facebook grows 1111% very often. It only takes 15 minutes to move an account and get it working on a new server. That process could even be automated if it had to. The site would display 'Be Right Back' until fully set up on the new server.

    If 15 minutes of your site displaying 'Be Right Back', probably only happening once in your lifetime is a deal killer, then you probably need RackSpace.
      0 Not allowed!

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Modesto California
    Posts
    6,461
    Quote Originally Posted by azoundria View Post
    It occurred to me Noppix, that you may have a somewhat different idea from mine here.

    The credits are decreased based on usage. The client doesn't spend them, except by having used resources.

    In order for a server to go from 90% to 100%, a client has to actually require those resources. For example, they could need to upload a very large number of files to their website (that would be one case) or a huge traffic surge. Mind you, as I said, we are looking at a huge increase (1111%), and this takes time.

    The instant the server goes past 90%, that's when accounts would be moved. Between that point and 100% is a considerable amount of time. Not even Facebook grows 1111% very often. It only takes 15 minutes to move an account and get it working on a new server. That process could even be automated if it had to. The site would display 'Be Right Back' until fully set up on the new server.

    If 15 minutes of your site displaying 'Be Right Back', probably only happening once in your lifetime is a deal killer, then you probably need RackSpace.
    If you were to use this type of system, wouldn't it just make more sense to bill the client at the end of each month or resources they have used instead of requiring them to pay a credit? Example, you charge an x amount of money per MB of disk-space used and an x amount of money per MB of bandwidth used? Similar to your monthly electric bill?

    I still thing paying a flat fee every month is the best way to go, but its definitely an interesting idea.
    Need Web Hosting? Click Here to Learn Why You Should Switch To FernGullyGraphics
    FernGullyGraphics --- 426 14th St. Suite #115 --- Modesto, California --- 95354

    Need Business Cards? Click Here
      0 Not allowed!

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,904
    It's an idea that has come and gone for the past 5 years, maybe longer.

    Bottom line is no host would allow these credits to 'roll-over' into the next month. So in the end, whether you give the client credits or tell them what their usage limits are...it's the same thing.

    Buying X amount of credits would end up being the same as buying package A.
      0 Not allowed!

  14. #14
    If you were to use this type of system, wouldn't it just make more sense to bill the client at the end of each month or resources they have used instead of requiring them to pay a credit? Example, you charge an x amount of money per MB of disk-space used and an x amount of money per MB of bandwidth used? Similar to your monthly electric bill?
    That's exactly how it works. At the end of a month, you get a bill. But rather than cash, it's paid in the credits you already have. And rather than pay it, it's already been paid. If your resulting balance is negative, then you can top up and keep hosting. The purpose of credits is to encourage a more long-term purchase. If you're just paying month by month, at the end of the month like you proposed, you'll end up paying a bit more (but still less than a traditional package).

    I guess with a small-ish site on a host that doesn't oversell, you're only trading small change for a system you're more accustomed to. That's the tough challenge I was hoping to solve.

    Bottom line is no host would allow these credits to 'roll-over' into the next month. So in the end, whether you give the client credits or tell them what their usage limits are...it's the same thing.
    Sorry. I don't understand why no one would allow credits to roll over into the next month? That's pretty fundamental, that credits are yours to use on whatever hosting you need in whatever month you may need it. I am really confused by this statement.
      0 Not allowed!

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,904
    Quote Originally Posted by azoundria View Post
    Sorry. I don't understand why no one would allow credits to roll over into the next month? That's pretty fundamental, that credits are yours to use on whatever hosting you need in whatever month you may need it. I am really confused by this statement.
    So you would want to buy $100 worth of credits, let's say 100.

    Month | Credit Use
    1 | 0
    2 | 0
    3 | 0
    4 | 0
    5 | 0
    ...
    11 | 50
    12 | 50
    ---------

    So you're telling me, as a host, I allocated space for you for two whole years for $100? Not feasible.
      0 Not allowed!

  16. #16
    Why is that necessary to allocate for 2 years?

    In 2 years, the client may have abandoned that site and be working on another. In 2 years, their usage may be totally different.

    Before a client needs more space, or bandwidth, I find it for them. I ensure there is at least 10% growth room on the servers, and always a new server with more space that could be moved to easily. That's my allocation.

    If you paid $100, you'll get $100 worth of hosting. If you only used $0.50 worth of hosting, you still have $99.50 worth of hosting left (and PayPal did not just take 0.33 for that month). Why on Earth should anyone take that from you?
      0 Not allowed!

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,904
    Quote Originally Posted by azoundria View Post
    Why is that necessary to allocate for 2 years?

    In 2 years, the client may have abandoned that site and be working on another. In 2 years, their usage may be totally different.

    Before a client needs more space, or bandwidth, I find it for them. I ensure there is at least 10% growth room on the servers, and always a new server with more space that could be moved to easily. That's my allocation.

    If you paid $100, you'll get $100 worth of hosting. If you only used $0.50 worth of hosting, you still have $99.50 worth of hosting left. Why on Earth should anyone take that from you?
    Exactly! As long as the client has credits. I NEVER know when they'll be using them. So I ALWAYS have to allocate SOMETHING for them. You say 10%.

    Meaning, if they don't use up their credits for 5 years. I allocated 10% specifically for them for 5 years...for $100.
      0 Not allowed!

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Vista, CA
    Posts
    1,060
    Long term contract always good chance for the client to get web hosting services cheaper.
    WebIntellects - Fully Managed Dedicated and Virtual Private Servers since1999.
    WebhostGIANT - LOW Cost Hosting
      0 Not allowed!

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,904
    Quote Originally Posted by WebhostGIANT-Rob View Post
    Long term contract always good chance for the client to get web hosting services cheaper.
    That's the thing. The OP doesn't want a contract. He wants a pay as you go system so you only pay for what you use, whenever you use it, no matter how long it takes.
      0 Not allowed!

  20. #20
    10% for each server, not individual client.

    If you stay dormant with your $99.50 for 5 years, meaning you're not using any hosting, there's no reason to allocate anything until you start up another website. Then, at that point, you would be created on the newest server.
    Last edited by azoundria; 03-11-2011 at 03:59 AM.
      0 Not allowed!

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,904
    Quote Originally Posted by azoundria View Post
    10% for all the clients on a server, not individually.
    I realize you may think this is a good idea, but it really isn't feasible from the provider's side. You simply can't say, "You have enough credits for 2000GB of bandwidth. You can use that WHENEVER you want."

    Just simply not possible.

    WHENEVER != Today OR This Week OR This Month OR This Year OR Next 2 Years
      0 Not allowed!

  22. #22
    I hope I get the autor's point.
    Do you mean that if you need 2GB of space and 10GB of bandwidth per month then you shouldn't pay for an account which has 5/50 specs? Plus an option of using it whenever you want it and paying only then? Well... that would mean a complete disaster to the host IMO.

    I am sorry to tell you that, but it is really wrong thinking and shows substantial lack of knowledge about this business. Some of the people here have already answered that but it just doesn't work that way. Let's say it's more like you pay half the price just to bring profit and then you pay for the specs so the price doesn't go up or down in a straight line. This is a mistake very often committed by unexperienced users woving for lower price. It isn't about the price just for the specs. It's so much more than the shiny table presenting a company's hosting plans...

    Of course, there is something you probably mean - it's already here to take : ) Cloud is something like this but there you pay a lot more at the beginning and you pay for this "assurance" which someone earlier wrote about - that one day you will need 10 per cent, some other day - 30 per cent of server resources.

    Well... there is room for marketing people for such ideas but it has to be really well thought over because hosting business is one of the kind and it needs careful planning, a strategy, a bit of forecasting and... luck.

    And one more - hosts generally earn most on overselling. This is like speculating with dreams, what will people use, what they won't, etc. By demanding only what you need, when you need, you just crash the main idea of making money in this business.

    It's like telling the bakery "produce only for my family, but I can't guarantee we will take 500 rolls and 1000 loafs of bread every morning, we will take 30 - 5 one day, then maybe our friends will come and we will take 50 - 8" etc. This would ruin the buisness.
    Last edited by Sponsi; 03-11-2011 at 04:33 AM.
      0 Not allowed!

  23. #23
    I guess I understand...

    If I want to sell this I just have to use the word cloud?
      0 Not allowed!

  24. #24
    Well.. maybe not "just", maybe not "cloud", but I just gave you my thoughts and as far as I'm concerned, I see your point of view and I see a kind of service which is close to your idea and well... it turns out that cloud is the keyword.

    Have you read about this? Google it, read about it both in technical terms and check out offers - then come back and share your views on that. But it's a different level of hosting, it's not about "losing time" with small customers, it's like VPS hosting with prices really reflecting this scaling (another keyword) you probably mean in your idea.

    To some extent, there is something in it, but like I wrote earlier - it needs a lot of analysis and it's really a higher level than typical shared hosting.

    Hmm.. when I come to think of it, you will probably pay this excessive price in cloud as well but here the marketing people took care of this feeling that you pay for something you don't use. In cloud you "should feel" you pay a bit more not for the resources themselves but for this feeling you can use more in a brink of an eye. You pay for possibilities.
    Last edited by Sponsi; 03-11-2011 at 04:58 AM.
      0 Not allowed!

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    934
    I think the biggest obstacle to your idea might actually be the accounting My prepaid cell phone operates on the same principle, but there's a one year maximum time limit on the credits purchased. Without that odd clause, prorating the cash coming in gets messy.

    A nice side-effect for the cell phone company is that, even though the unused credits do roll over, I will always end up with more unused credits than I'll ever need, and there's no way I can ever get it back out. Except for some people who seriously only need the phone for a month, this effectively becomes a low-end $8/month plan.

    My ramblings aside, you can always market and model it the same way.
      0 Not allowed!

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Cumbernauld, Scotland, UK
    Posts
    734
    I started such a service, known as "bricks"
    Customers bought the "foundations" and then added "bricks", either with the "foundations" or as and when required

    The entry level was 10MB with 100MB of bandwidth
    Items could then be added, including additional webspace, bandwidth, email, databases, and so on

    However, after two years I found most people only needed the smallest amount to start off with

    I have continued this same model, which is ideal for those that upload lots of photos, but don't have a popular website, and so on

    On renewal we then recommend an alternative package, if it would be cheaper, is a better use of what they currently pay, or if their website is increasing that they should consider upgrading
    M8 INTERNET : Simple and cost effective website hosting from the UK
    M8 INTERNET : Google Ads Account Management
      0 Not allowed!

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    3,807
    Quote Originally Posted by Noppix View Post
    It's an idea that has come and gone for the past 5 years, maybe longer.

    Bottom line is no host would allow these credits to 'roll-over' into the next month. So in the end, whether you give the client credits or tell them what their usage limits are...it's the same thing.

    Buying X amount of credits would end up being the same as buying package A.
    nfshost.com seems to handling rollover just fine
      0 Not allowed!

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,904
    Quote Originally Posted by azoundria View Post
    I guess I understand...

    If I want to sell this I just have to use the word cloud?
    You can't just use the word cloud. Cloud infrastructures are a real thing and if it's not something you have...you can't just use it.

    Quote Originally Posted by quantumphysics View Post
    nfshost.com seems to handling rollover just fine
    They probably don't have very many clients, I don't know. Didn't look too closely.
      0 Not allowed!

  29. #29
    Sometimes I think I try to hard, when all I had to do was wait and the helpful comments would come.

    you can always market and model it the same way.
    When I went to pick out a cell phone, I went to the store and looked at various pamphlets. My attention span with a pamphlet and this reduced competition is 30 seconds. On the internet, in a wide market like hosting, I only have 5.

    For whatever reason, people have a lot of trouble understanding that they only have 5 seconds to market to potential customers on the internet. Nobody really reads long pieces of text, and certainly not the important famous people which would really grow your business. (Except on forums like this, sometimes via email, and maybe if they were searching for a tutorial - but generally you have 5 seconds.)

    You pay for possibilities.
    It's mostly reduced hassle, if I understand. With a fixed size server, in house or not, you still have to worry about when is the time to upgrade it, and then do that upgrade. With cloud, it's already done. You can be at home in the sunshine with your kids for that time (though it never happens like that).

    I think the biggest obstacle to your idea might actually be the accounting
    I already have a working model where the credits are topped up based on earnings from Google AdSense. And I am nearly ready to launch it based on forum posts. (I am traditionally a free host, in that my goal is to help to roughly 95% of the globe to which could never be your customer.) I don't imagine accepting payments to be that much of a challenge.

    I started such a service, known as "bricks"
    Can you PM me a link? I want to see how you marketed it! (I did check m8internet but for whatever reason no images were loading )

    You can't just use the word cloud. Cloud infrastructures are a real thing and if it's not something you have...you can't just use it.
    Kind of my point, but also kind of not sure - the technology is older than the term by far, and I obviously wouldn't be the only one misusing the term. People really need to make up their mind on what it means.

    nfshost.com seems to handling rollover just fine
    Beautiful. That site is older than our service, so in fact Noppix' estimate was underestimating. This is an idea that's been thrown around for a lot longer than 5 years - in fact 9 years now it would appear. I do notice they were a lot better at marketing in 2005. Though there's some debate if they were always pay-as-you-go.

    So I'm starting to see what's happened with them and why they're probably not hugely popular. The homepage has little direction. For example, if I want to sign up, what do I do? Oh wait, I see it at the top. Well, but wait. It's not that easy... And this 0.25 deposit - PayPal eats that up faster than (you can make up wat to put here). I plan to make this easy. You fill out a form and make your first credit purchase (min $10), done. You're in.

    Next, this by-the-day thing is silly. Nobody has time to check things in such detail every day. For my plan, it's once a month, a quick summary. The baseline is one standard rate. Storage and bandwidth are simple fractions. Unless the balance is negative, there's nothing you need to do.

    In summary, they are literally pushing people away by making the system complicated. Hey, at least their TOS is shorter than most.


    Thanks a lot. Very helpful stuff here. I really appreciate all of you taking the time to help me out with this. One final thing I thought of...

    There will always be this segment of the market that prefers the standard hosting, so I could set up partnership deals where other hosts can resell to them, and collect the extra revenue difference. It's got the benefits of not having to run a server, and also the benefit of scalability as you grow. Companies could literally focus on their customer relations and marketing without worrying about the backend technical and sometimes frustrating bit of things, and probably earn just as much (yes I get a cut, but I also get a cheaper rate buying in bulk, and later on save you IT costs, plus my panel has a few handy tools you wont find in WHM alone). I guess this is practically a whole different topic, but you can see I have a plan for this part as well.

    So yeah, any great marketing ideas, potential shortfalls, failures, more similiar services you want to show, etc... these are very helpful to me to make this work.
    Last edited by azoundria; 03-11-2011 at 09:36 PM.
      0 Not allowed!

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    3,807
    Quote Originally Posted by azoundria View Post
    Beautiful. That site is older than our service, so in fact Noppix' estimate was underestimating. This is an idea that's been thrown around for a lot longer than 5 years - in fact 9 years now it would appear. I do notice they were a lot better at marketing in 2005. Though there's some debate if they were always pay-as-you-go.

    So I'm starting to see what's happened with them and why they're probably not hugely popular. The homepage has little direction. For example, if I want to sign up, what do I do? Oh wait, I see it at the top. Well, but wait. It's not that easy... And this 0.25 deposit - PayPal eats that up faster than (you can make up wat to put here). I plan to make this easy. You fill out a form and make your first credit purchase (min $10), done. You're in.

    Next, this by-the-day thing is silly. Nobody has time to check things in such detail every day. For my plan, it's once a month, a quick summary. The baseline is one standard rate. Storage and bandwidth are simple fractions. Unless the balance is negative, there's nothing you need to do.

    In summary, they are literally pushing people away by making the system complicated. Hey, at least their TOS is shorter than most.


    Thanks a lot. Very helpful stuff here. I really appreciate all of you taking the time to help me out with this. One final thing I thought of...

    There will always be this segment of the market that prefers the standard hosting, so I could set up partnership deals where other hosts can resell to them, and collect the extra revenue difference. It's got the benefits of not having to run a server, and also the benefit of scalability as you grow. Companies could literally focus on their customer relations and marketing without worrying about the backend technical and sometimes frustrating bit of things, and probably earn just as much (yes I get a cut, but I also get a cheaper rate buying in bulk, and later on save you IT costs, plus my panel has a few handy tools you wont find in WHM alone). I guess this is practically a whole different topic, but you can see I have a plan for this part as well.
    They are kinda for the nerdier types, probably- not your 'average cPanel point and click' user.

    Is your service easy to use?

    No.
    Last edited by quantumphysics; 03-11-2011 at 09:42 PM.
      0 Not allowed!

  31. #31
    They are kinda for the nerdier types
    Not sure... All that free speech and anti-corporate stuff sounds fairly political.


    Do people think I should have unlimited resources, and then pay as you go for those, a system of fixed limits, but the request for more is automated and only fails if they don't exist, or something more traditional.

    I could even make it so the system detects you are about to run out and upgrades for you. It's just a matter of how much to make things hassle-free versus giving users more control over the usage.
      0 Not allowed!

  32. #32
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Cumbernauld, Scotland, UK
    Posts
    734
    Quote Originally Posted by azoundria View Post
    Can you PM me a link? I want to see how you marketed it! (I did check m8internet but for whatever reason no images were loading
    Thanks for pointing out the images weren't loading on "m8internet"
    I figured out you used www and have now corrected this
    As mentioned above, we originally used to offer this between 1999 and 2002, but it now comes under the "add-ons" after the packages were revised in 2002
    M8 INTERNET : Simple and cost effective website hosting from the UK
    M8 INTERNET : Google Ads Account Management
      0 Not allowed!

  33. #33
    Do you have an old copy of the site so I can see how you marketed it?

    And thanks everyone for your posts. There's so much great feedback and so many ideas in here that will be a huge help!
      0 Not allowed!

  34. #34
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    8,985
    Nearlyfreespeech does this already, how's it groundbreaking?
    David
    Web hosting by Fused For businesses with more important things to do than worry about their hosting.
      0 Not allowed!

  35. #35
    Groundbreaking would be doing it well.

    For the reasons in my previous post, I'm not convinced Nearlyfreespeech is nearly as successful as they could be with simple modifications.

    I really only have one chance to pitch this to people, people who are busy and have 10,000 hosts to choose from operating on a different payment model.

    Groundbreaking would be doing it well.
    Last edited by azoundria; 03-14-2011 at 04:37 PM.
      0 Not allowed!

Similar Threads

  1. Pay per click? pay per registration? pay per visits????
    By pesst in forum Ecommerce Hosting & Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-27-2006, 06:43 AM
  2. Any good Pay-Per-Sale (aka Pay-Per-Lead or Pay-Per-Action) advertisers?
    By SaintsServers in forum Running a Web Hosting Business
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-16-2006, 04:38 PM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-24-2004, 07:50 PM
  4. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 09-13-2004, 04:10 AM
  5. Australian Minimum Pay Laws - Can we still pay on commision bases?
    By JKhoury in forum Running a Web Hosting Business
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 01-08-2004, 07:44 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •